CNN has learned the United States has intercepts of conversations among top Syrian military officials discussing the chemical weapons attack after it took place last week, according to a U.S. official.

The intercepts form a key basis for the conclusion that the Syrian regime was behind the attack. But another crucial piece of evidence about what type of chemicals may have been used remains to be determined. Tissue samples and other medical and forensic evidence taken from victims has not yet been fully analyzed, the official said. One source familiar with the latest intelligence said getting that information would provide the strongest case for the use of chemical weapons.

CNN has previously reported Israeli military intelligence provided the United States with intercepts between Syrian military commanders discussing the movement of chemical weapons to the area of the attack before it happened, according to a diplomatic source.

The administration has said it would release a declassified version of its intelligence assessment about last week's attack outside Damascus. White House spokesman Josh Ernest said Thursday the declassified version is not yet complete but should be released by the end of the week.

The intelligence includes an assessment of what level of involvement Syrian President Bashar al-Assad had in last week's chemical attack, but that information remains classified and might not be released to the American public, a senior U.S. official said.

The White House is struggling with how much information to release publicly because it could compromise the sources of intelligence about who ordered the attack, the official said.

President Barack Obama said in an interview Wednesday the U.S. government has "concluded that the Syrian government in fact carried out" the attack - a sentiment echoed by U.S. officials across Washington.

But one question remaining is whether the attack was ordered by al-Assad himself. On that question, the senior U.S. official said, the administration has a "very clear answer" - but declined to say what that answer is - citing the classified nature of the intelligence.

The first U.S. official told CNN the intelligence assessment shows the attack was ordered at the "highest levels" of the regime. That official declined to specifically say whether al-Assad ordered the attack but did not rule it out.
"We are not saying Assad himself had his finger on the button. But he is responsible for the stockpile and any attack like this would have to have been approved at the highest levels," he said. He rejected the notion the evidence of regime involvement was circumstantial.

"We have a very solid case to indicate the regime was behind this."

That official said the evidence shows it was not a "rogue element" of the Syrian regime that carried out the attack, or the Syrian rebels. Another U.S. official echoed the idea that the intelligence assessment shows it was not a rogue element of the regime.

None of these officials spoke on the record due to the sensitive nature of the information.
Publicly, U.S. officials say it is irrelevant whether Assad actually ordered the attack or not, arguing that Assad is responsible for the actions of his regime.

"The commander-in-chief of any military is ultimately responsible for decisions made under their leadership, even if command and control - he's not the one that pushes the button or said, 'Go,' on this," State Department deputy spokeswoman Marie Harf said Wednesday.

On Thursday, the British government released a summary of its intelligence assessment that concluded "it is highly likely that the (Syrian) regime was responsible" for the attack. British intelligence "had high confidence in all of its assessments except in relation to the regime's precise motivation for carrying out an attack of this scale at this time - though intelligence may increase our confidence in the future," the document said.

Separately, the U.S. intelligence community currently is focusing heavily on any real time movements by the Syrian leadership, its forces, or elements of the regime in reaction to the possibility of military action by the U.S., the senior official said.

"We do not want to go blind and deaf," about the location of key elements of the regime. "We want to see what 'looks different,' what 'might be different' and how we stay ahead of the game," the official said.

This becomes crucial to ensuring that all targeting remains up to date and the U.S. has the latest information about the location of chemical weapons sites. The U.S. intelligence community is also trying to assess in detail any possible reactions by al-Assad in advance of a possible U.S. strike, and afterward if one is ordered, including the possibility he will launch more attacks.

"We are not ruling anything out," the official said. There have been reports of some weapons including aircraft being dispersed to avoid a possible U.S. missile strike. The U.S. also believes Assad will continue to move other assets around, but will remain in control of the chemical stockpile, the official said.

The United States also is closely watching Lebanese Hezbollah as well as the Iranians for any signs they could launch proxy attacks against Syria's neighbors, including Israel and Iraq, in retaliation for a potential U.S. strike.

soundoff(192 Responses)

This was just another failure to act by our administration. Obama and the White House are so over their heads they have no clue how to handle Syria. I saw the press conference today between France and America. Yeah, France? Obama is drowning. Syria will never hand over all the weapons.

Am I missing something here? Why would any country launch a military strike against another with no intent of winning? Why do we, the USA, want yet another country to police yet not be in control? Iraq was a big failure, Afghanistan a big failure, Vietnam a big failure, Egypt – still undecided, but doubtful. Libya? Israel? Pakistan? What are we doing??? The old British Empire nor the Romans would ever think this way! If you go to war, you must go to win! Just be careful what you might win!

It's all politics, Stan. The right-wing thugs in Washington were hoping to take over Syria by using this riff raft, the so-called "rebels". The problem is, is that these riff raft lost the initiative in this civil war and now need a direct U.S. intervention in one way or another! In the meantime, these thugs are hoping to keep these obscene wars "politically" popular!!!

No, it is more about economics! Syria is Russia's friend. Has anyone talked to Putin about this?
Russia has a naval base in Syria on the Mediterranean coast. They will not see this base lost!
Our European friends can't afford to cross Putin. Today Russia (Putin) supplies most of Europe with gas and oil. Cross Putin, and you get your gas cut off! Putin does not take kindly any political challengers, most challengers mysteriously disappear!
France is one exception. France chose nuclear energy to remain self sufficient. France is not subject to Putin's control of gas and oil.

September 1, 2013 at 8:24 am |

George patton

Wrong, Stan. Actually, Russia has far less to do with the situation in Syria than we Americans do. It is we Americans who are supplying this riff raft in Syria with all kinds of weapons for the purpose of overthrowing the Assad regime. The problem now is that these thugs are on the losing side of Syria's civil war and that thug Obama wants to change that!!!

September 1, 2013 at 12:44 pm |

StanCalif

So, if the "rebels" are losing then let them lose! This is not OUR battle! These are Muslims killing Muslims. We, the US, don't even know who many of these "rebels" are. They have no central command, no common goals. Syria is just a place now for Muslims to kill other Muslims they don't like! When the "rebels" lose, what do you think Assad will do with them? All will be killed! This is what they do to each other! Look what is happening in Iraq. We got rid of their dictator for them. But this is not good enough! Now they go back to killing each other! We, the US, have no business getting involved in this mess!

Barbara Starr!! Did you just publish an intelligence leak from the US government? One that could lead to Syrian Officials knowing how and when we spy on them? Directly identifying a target of an intelligence investigation? Wow, and some reporters thought that Glenn Greenwald was a downright dirty criminal and he didn't even identify any direct targets. I completely agree with those who say that reporters who publish unauthorized leaks as well as their sources should be prosecuted to the fullest. Please report to the nearest FBI office and turn yourself and your source in for prosecution. According to the Obama administration, both of you deserve to spend the rest of your lives in prison!

soon Israel will be nuked boom and all the Jews get blown up in the air. soon there will be blood from the asses of small Jewish children beat that Jewish child with a metal rod for 100 days right and left blow after blow.

I will not name oligarchs... oligarchs seem to have a way of having bad luck...you can find this stuff in the news history albiet they are not called oligarchs but that is what they are. one crashed his black supper car in Niece a decade ago.

the Syrian government- of which I am not a fan of- has nothing to gain by gassing the civilians
1-No military objective that makes any sense
2-POOR POLITICALLY
3-Knows it would be immediately condemned by the world
4-The Syrian government welcomed the inspectors- if they initiated this- why would they welcome the inspectors to research?
5-Possible forged communications to make it seem the government was the guilty party- If Mr. Phelps from Mission impossible could pull this fraud over- anybody can –

1-No military objective that makes any sense
-Show off what they are willing to do if the people do not bow down

2-POOR POLITICALLY
-It castrate US foreign policy sine the US will not intervene.

3-Knows it would be immediately condemned by the world
-They government showed they could care less about the world when they started shelling civilian tenements.

4-The Syrian government welcomed the inspectors- if they initiated this- why would they welcome the inspectors to research?
-Inspectors invited 5 days after the attack. The sample quality would have degraded to the point where it would be hard to tell how weaponized the chemicals were thus they could claim it was the rebels.

5-Possible forged communications to make it seem the government was the guilty party- If Mr. Phelps from Mission impossible could pull this fraud over- anybody can –
-This is your only statement I cannot argue against.

The United States should base our decision on our own intelligence. We had intelligence about Saddam Hussein given to
us my another nation stating he had attempted to purchase yellow-cake (used for nuclear weapons). The evidence was completely fabricated. One does have no wonder why an outside nation would completely fabricate evidence to attempt
to convince the United States to go to War against Iraq?

I agree! This is Israel's "golden moment" to trick the US into attacking Syria! If we attack Syria, why not attack Iran? This is Israel's goal! Both Iran and Russia would be very p***off if we attack Syria, yet Russia and Iran sit quietly and do nothing about Assad using gas on his own people! The Russian people and Iranian people need to learn something here. If your friend can gas people, why can't we? Political opponents in Russia and Iran seem to "disappear" suddenly.

What makes sense here? That the Assad regime would sign it's own death warrant by doing the ONE THING the United States has already stated publicly would lead to their intervening militarily? Or that Al Qaeda, who desperately want the US to get involved and are known to possess chemical weapons, would attack their own rebels to assure it? When has Al Qaeda ever hesitated to bomb fellow muslims when it suited their purposes? I know applying the common sense test doesn't always work when it comes to Middle East politics, but there is no doubt that it is Al Qaeda, not Assad who has everything to gain and virtually nothing to lose except a 1,000 or so easily replaced martyrs.

I haven't concluded anything. I'm saying I'm going to need a lot more than some communications between Syrian officers that a) may or may not be genuine, and b) if they are genuine are not guaranteed to be between officers loyal to Assad. If you think things are as cut and dried in that region that two officers talking about chemical weapons proves that Assad ordered the attacks, you haven't been paying attention.

Again, what is Assad's motive for assuring his own defeat?

August 30, 2013 at 10:07 am |

StanCalif

And who gave us these intercepts? They came from Israel! Israel has a big stake in convincing the US to attack Syria. Israel has been trying to connive a reason for the US to attack Iran! Fortunately, Obama would have nothing to do with their plots. But if Israel can get us to attack Syria, attacking Iran would become a much easier argument. The USA is not ruled by Israel, although it is hard to debate this. Our Congress loves Israel, it is good that Obama never trusted them!

August 30, 2013 at 3:31 pm |

Reality Man

@StanCalif: You really think we need Israel to do a radio intercept?

August 31, 2013 at 12:18 am |

Marcus

@ Reality Man
Although I don't believe in the info myself, it is to be noted that not all comunications work on the same frequencies thus Israel could, and most likely should, be able to intercept a conveersation in Syria and no else but them.
But I don't trust Israel on that one.

August 31, 2013 at 11:28 am |

barbara

This is from another commenter: "Syrian rebels in the Damascus suburb of Ghouta have admitted to Associated Press journalist Dale Gavlak that they were responsible for last week’s chemical weapons incident which western powers have blamed on Bashar Al-Assad’s forces, revealing that the casualties were the result of an accident caused by rebels mishandling chemical weapons provided to them by Saudi Arabia.

“From numerous interviews with doctors, Ghouta residents, rebel fighters and their families….many believe that certain rebels received chemical weapons via the Saudi intelligence chief, Prince Bandar bin Sultan, and were responsible for carrying out the (deadly) gas attack,” writes Gavlak. "ter on another sight. This shows the extent that our government is willing to lie to us.

Ha, ha, ha! The politics of good ole stupid GWB still exist! Where is all that Iraqi oil that Cheney promised would pay for our adventure into Iraq? Politicians lie whenever they talk!
President Obama, stay out of Syria!!! Syria is a trap, set up by Russia, Iran and Israel! Screw John McCain, He needs to retire and enjoy the good life his government pensions will provide!

Lol you only think half? Its okay though, it pretty easy to pick out the foreigners, especially non-westerners. The mussies in particular are very easy to identify, just look for the guys blaming Israel for, well, just about anything. The Russkies are a little harder to detect, but all one must do is observe consistent irrational anti-americanism from them plus pro-communist bullcrap and it becomes fairly obvious, besides some of their mannerisms and way of talking/writing. The asiatic ones are pretty easy to find too, asians by their nature are very nationalistic and easy to identify. Quite honestly they tend not to comment unless the article is about their country or one of their neighborhood rivals. Also they usually don't try to hide really.

I find our many foreign Security Blog denizens both amusing and many times downright informative. Don't totally write off the foreigners even if they are all crazy SOBs.

Well that's a fairly Assadist point of view. Leave George Patton alone, I enjoy watching him and his doppelganger argue like a two-headed beast lol. I also do enjoy the history behind the real George S. Patton, obviously one of the greatest generals of all American and even World history. However, Patton fought to ensure that America wouldn't be ruled by the Hun and his Hun logic. And also because he thought he was the reincarnation of Hannibal Barca, but whatever. I'm sure the real Patton would have found our Security Blog George and whooped the tar out of him by now were he still with us, but he died in a car accident some many decades before most us were born so I guess he won't mind.

August 30, 2013 at 1:52 pm |

oldtigger

Some times we just have to admit that we can't save the world from itself!

Unfortunately very true! Israel would love it if we bomb Syria. After Syria, then Iran! This is the whole point! Please DO NOT believe Israeli intelligence reports!!! Israel has its own agenda, "somehow trick the US into bombing Iran". This is Israel's "golden moment"! Obama doesn't trust Israel (for very good reasons), but our Congress just loves and adores Israel (for very good $ reasons)!

America is the root of all terror. America has invaded sixty countries since world war 2.
In 1953 America overthrow Iran's democratic government Mohammad Mosaddegh and installed a brutal dictator Shah. America helped Shah of Iran to establish secret police and killed thousands of Iranian people.
During Iran-Iraq war evil America supported Suddam Hossain and killed millions of Iranian people. In 1989, America, is the only country ever, shot down Iran's civilian air plane, killing 290 people.
In 2003,America invaded Iraq and killed 1,000,000+ innocent Iraqi people and 4,000,000+ Iraqi people were displaced.
Now America is a failed state with huge debt. Its debt will be 22 trillion by 2015.

I do not doubt that Assad used chemical weapons. You don't even need super-secret spying to be able to figure that one out. Who else in that region could develop and deploy a chemical weapon capable of killing an estimated 1300 people?

The questions here is what are we going to do about it, and should we? Ideally we would go in quickly secure and destroy the chemical stockpile and then get the heck out of there. Realistically though the government has even told us all week that they will not be taking on the chemical weapons stockpiles, but will instead be attacking conventional targets. At the least worrisome level this will be a repeat of Libya where we said we were just going to shoot planes down, but ended up bombing the entire countryside. At the worst case scenario we're going to tick off everyone involved in this proxy war mess and possibly ignite WW3.

Unless we have a quick, realistic, and viable plan with a good deal of international consent to secure the chemical weapons then we should not be risking the necks of our countrymen and our country itself in yet another messy middle east affair. Remember the middle east has been killing the people that live there since as far back as history goes. I really doubt they're going to stop anytime soon.

Your sure Assad did this? Funny they don't even know what was used yet. Their has to be tons of chemical weapons floating around in the middle east thanks to the U.S. and Russia. Just guessing most of it is in terrorist hands.

You make a good point USMC. I have been reading your posts on this blog and I always find your input to be very good. To answer your question, yes I think Assad did use chemical weapons. Mostly just because of the amount of casualties involved. Even if we do suppose that the rebels could produce chem weapons and implements needed to launch them, I doubt they would be able to secretly create a weapon on the magnitude of killing 1300 some people.

Don't get me wrong though, I don't think the rebels are saints. If the rebels get a hold of Assad's infamous stockpile then I'm sure we can expect more chemical attacks. Like I said, ideally we'd remove the chemical weapons and then keep ourselves out of this conflict. Realistically though our government isn't even planning to do that by their own admission and any action we take is going to come back on us in one way or another.

I have been following the syrian civil war since it started out as the arab spring protests. This is probably the most video-taped war ever. There's more than enough evidence out there that the Assad Forces and the Rebel Forces are both barbaric and violent. There's evidence of Assad's forces using chemical weapons and massacring people. Should we ally with them? Absolutely not. There's evidence of the rebels massacring civilians, probably the most infamous video is of the rebels cutting peoples' hearts out and eating them. Let's not forget the early rebels that maybe even did want democracy are mostly dead or disillusioned by now and their ranks have been swelled by foreign jihadist groups. Should we ally with them? Absolutely not.

If we intervene we additionally risk starting a war the likes of which has not been seen as just about every middle east and World power is involved in a little chess game in the syrian disaster. While the older generations might be bent on making war with everyone they should know that the younger generations are tired of fighting their pointless and often unjust wars only to lose money, freedoms, and credibility. We seriously risk some major domestic upheaval if we get too involved in this mess and it turns into a full blown war for America. Our best course of action is to either stay out of it all together or have the UN itself (not America) remove the chemical weapons.

August 30, 2013 at 6:40 am |

oldvoice

Naturally, before we commit American lives to such a fight we should have clear and indisputable evidence. Plus there must be a threat to America, not just American interests.

August 30, 2013 at 7:13 am |

John in WNY

oldvoice,

What you overlook is that things that threaten our national interest are in fact a threat against the US. Look at the Persian Gulf, it's in our national interest to keep it safe so oil tankers can sail threw it, but if say Iran was able to close the gulf and stopping oil shipment from there the damaged to the US economy would be immense, as it would be to many other countries around the world.

Now a case could be made over what is, and what isn't a true national interest, but thinking that just because it happens half a world away that it can't effect us is naive at best.

August 30, 2013 at 8:59 am |

John in WNY

Well considering that the rebels have taken several military bases around the country I don't think it unimaginable that they could have captured some of Syria's chemical weapon stockpiles.

And if that is the case can anyone really doubt that at least some of these rebel groups would be willing to use those weapons on their own people to try and not only draw support to their cause but also in the hopes that it resulted in US and other countries starting an air compaign against government forces?

As for the intercepts being proof, it depends what they say, because simply put if a commander is in charge of that area of the battlefield recieves word of a possible chemical attack in it he is surely going to start making calls to find out what's going on.

That thought had crossed my mind earlier when reading some comments on various articles. However I think if the rebels had captured part of Assad's Treasure Horde of Death that it would have been major news by both the rebel and Assad propaganda machines, and of course also pretty much all other world propaganda. Though I do admit I could see how such a turn of events might be hushed up too in some secret mystique plan to wait until the right time to use them. The only flaw in that is that if you suppose these bloodthirsty barbaric rebels have taken a hold of a good portion of these weapons that knowing the jihadist type they'd probably have soaked half of Syria by now in that poison if they had the chance.

As for the reason of why Assad would gas his own people, this is a funny argument people been raising. These people might not have been following the news too long because this is actually the third time Assad used chemical weapons this year. He probably thought the Red Line was a joke after the two smaller attacks, and now he's starting to realize that Obama ain't joking. That or you could figure Assad is insane. After all why start shelling and gunning down protestors and opening the chaos on your country to begin with? Look at his wife's lavish spending. Sadly he's not only insane, but very cunning indeed. Assad's propaganda was very terrible and easy to see the crap through at first, but now his department has mastered it quite well. Of course with the rebels now full of foreign jihadis and just kids that have grown up the past 3 years in violence have now made it pretty easy to display that the Rebels ain't no epic freedom fighters, more like radicalized murder machines.

As for the intercepts I never put much credence into them in the first place and really can come to the conclusion Assad used a big old chemical weapon conveniently on an area he had under siege (old trick right there) without Israel having to tell us. Though I don't doubt Israel's input, the intercepts are probably true quite honestly. I don't see why Israel would lie about that especially when Assad threatened to attack Israel if America attacks Assad. It be kind of dumb for them to pretty much try to lie about it to make us attack Syria and then have them get blamed for it.

Either way Rebels or Assad, if the goal isn't to remove the chemical weapons with the support of the UN or at least the Security Council, then we ought not drink out of the cup of sorrows that is Syria.

August 30, 2013 at 2:15 pm |

GIUK

You got to be kidding. Undisclosed sources within Israeli Intelligence services give the US recordings of people who are supposedly Syrian commanders (or not) talking about the chemical attacks. And most of the sources and details are "classified" so we just have to trust the government and go along!? Sure. Right. If you fall for that one I got a prime building lot on Jupiter I'll sell you cheap.

'John S', Starr is reporting things as she sees them. To suggest that she should burn for reporting her views is just about as goofy as the conflict in Syria. Granted, to send our troops or planes into Syria without definate proof of a threat to the US would be foolish and walking right into a conflict our enemies would applaud. So, one agrees with your point, just not your venom.

you can't have a government without a military and you cannot have a modern military without oil- as far as the aristocrates Russia has jewish oligarchs which automaticaly have israelie citizenship e.g. the money in russia is israelie national money indirectly or directly. opps...i mean OPS wait...fact is leadership cannot survive without a military- ultimatly militarys and leaders cannot survive without other militarys existance...why not attack Iran after all they are involved...wait...i thought I already explained it...what?...this stuff is not for everybody that's for sure...but you already know that...shame on you protester...wait...

Of course you can trust us, we are the government! The same people that brought you Fast and Furious, government guns to drug cartels. Benghazigate, another "phony scandal" that left a dead diplomat and Navy SEALs. Big Brother in your back pocket. "Can you hear me now?" "YES WE CAN!"

Why? Why would our government lay it's ace of spades on the table? Why would we, at this point, announce to the world that we can intercept communications between Syrian military officials? I have not heard one reporter ask this question.

The answer? We wouldn't. I have serious doubts as to this claim's validity.

I'm remembering Dick Cheney and his New York Times ruse. Cheney fed his own propaganda to the Times, and then went on TV to say, "The New York Times says this..."

The U.S. administration does not know what chemical agent was used. They don't know for certain who used it. What's even worse they have no plan and no real goal. They said publicly that their goal is not to overthrow Assad. What is it then? To prolong the civil war by slightly tipping the scale?

Nobody is saying that the weapons of mass destruction were used. Whatever it was, most likely it was low grade toxic chemical that is no real threat to U.S. or even Israel, and has no potential to cause massive loss of civilian lives, at least no more than conventional weapons. So what is this all about? The president mentioned a "red line" and now he is under pressure to do something to fend off republican attacks and to improve his poll numbers. So, a missile strike would do. The president will look tough, there will be no american boots on the ground, and, of course, nothing of substance will be achieved. I wish this country had a foreign policy based on long-term national interests, and not the minor gains and losses on the political scene.

" I wish this country had a foreign policy based on long-term national interests, and not the minor gains and losses on the political scene."-

Ha! They do. Research the history of our involvement in the middle east. It has everything to do with maintaining the solvency of the petrodollar, and nothing at all to do with "the spread of democracy" or humanitarianism. Look up "Nixon, OPEC and the gold standard"...the money trail starts there, or dare I say, the FIAT currency. This whole mess began right around the time Nixon took the US dollar off the gold standard and the fed began printing worthless greenbacks that had no value save for that which the oil producing nations ascribed to it. Well, the dollar is about to be unseated as the world's reserve currency and that means hard times the likes of which Americans have never experienced, not even during the great depression. Our foreign policy is all about OIL and nothing else, never was about anything else.

The intercepts don't matter, it is not our fight, they are not our friends. The american people are speaking overwhelmingly that we do not want any involvement in Syria. Striking Syria will cause nothing but years of problems. Follow the UK's lead, listen to the american public.

Barbara Star, the Pentagon "reporter" said precisely nothing in that interview. What a cheap charade. These so called news reporters should be ashamed of themselves for not being in the least bit adversarial to the administration in the run-up to another war on bogus pretext.

I want a detailed chemical analysis done down to the tiniest molecule. For how can we as a country even act without sin and yet knowingly have helped kill humans with chemicals ourselves? Both the United States and West Germany sold Iraq pesticides and poisons that would be used to create chemical and other weapons, such as Roland missiles during the IRan -Iraq war! And yet we can sell chemicals and poisons and be without sin? WRONG! How dare we now go in unilaterally to try to act like some moral nation when the crimes we have committed against others seems to matter not. Our military acts as though their evils are all okay and selling poisons to Iraq was the moral thing to do? Someone help me to make sense of our military's actions and historical wrongs, please! I only pray that it wasn't those chemicals that were used, chemicals and poisons we sold to Iraq that made their way into the wrong hands. Perhaps the rebels of syria don't have sophisticated missiles but just the mere fact that we, without moral conscience could have ever even sold chemicals to be used on humans makes my heart ache and my head spin.

this is ridiculous! the mideast has more than enough resources and money to make decisions and intervene. just look at saudi arabia, uae, etc etc etc. it is just crazy we are dipping ourselves into another war. we need to think about our children and their future by paying down our national debt and lowering the unemployment rate.

That's pretty much true – especially when the 'War Drums' are pounding.

August 29, 2013 at 11:07 pm |

Lyndsie Graham

Here's this jerk again, doing his best to tear down Gen. George Patton's good name by posting his nonsense under it for his own personal amusement!

August 30, 2013 at 4:53 am |

TiredOfPaying

General Patton's 'good name' came about because he had no problem killing those that needed to be killed. If he had been given his way and continued to Moscow with his army at the end of WWII then the world would have been quite a different place. Its you who don't have the guts to realize that the entire problem is islam – and until islam is destroyed there will be more and larger death tolls. The mosques are the FIRST place to start looking for our enemies!

August 30, 2013 at 8:54 am |

George patton

Wrong TiredOfPaying, the true problem here is the global ambitions of the right-wing thugs in Washington who keep on trying to make themselves dominant in the world by pushing small third world countries around, not Islam! By the way, I am the true George patton here, not the clown above who keeps on using my name in order to be funny. That's why I call him Phunnie boy!

August 30, 2013 at 11:38 am |

George patton

GP wannabe above, true George died in 1945.do ya get it, do ya, punk?

August 30, 2013 at 1:15 pm |

manhandler1

It's always a safe bet that no matter what happens, we'll always be able to find you people spewing anti-american bs. Never have I seen so many retards hating on the Country and claiming things that aren't true. You people are disgusting. LEAVE if you think it's so bad here. Make sure it's a one way ticket.

We need to hear the intercepts and in what context the chem weapons were discussed, because I'm 100% sure high ranking American Generals discussed Chem weapons after the attack. Please no more shady evidence.

Shady evidence?? The Israelis wouldn't LIE now would they?? Like someone else posted – get the tapes of these 'supposed conversations' and then decide in what context they were being discussed – that is , IF there is any tape. Israel has a 'vested interest' in getting the West involved in another action against a country that hates them!!

Remember the French president telling Obama what a liar Netanyahu is –
"I cannot bear Netanyahu, he's a liar," Sarkozy told Obama, unaware that the microphones in their meeting room had been switched on, enabling reporters in a separate location to listen in to a simultaneous translation.

"You're fed up with him, but I have to deal with him even more often than you," Obama replied, according to the French interpreter.

August 30, 2013 at 12:28 am |

Mike

Israel will lie to the US, Israel has spied on the US (e.g. Jonathan Pollard), Israel has also attacked a US Navy ship in international waters (1967, USS Libery, 34 Americans killed), etc. Israel has always done what is best for Israel, as do most governments. If Israel feels US involvement in Syria is best for Israel, they will produce whatever evidence suits their cause. The US, Russia, the UK, China, and France are all doing what is in their own leaders' best interests as well. Right and wrong, good and evil, black and white are all crutches for those who can't see the real world is always a shade of gray.

August 30, 2013 at 2:58 am |

manhandler1

YOU don't get to hear anything because none of you creeps have anywhere near the status to get classified info. You people are absolutely hilarious. If you want to hear anything, get one of your other American hating friends to tell you. You can all have a party and tell anti-american bs to each other. And after your little party is over, you can all purchase one way tickets to Russia, or North Korea so you'll be in the company of other anti-american's and sit and hate on our Country 24/7.

Haha, so you want us to just take their word? NO THANKS. I personally will not believe until I hear with my own ears, cleared or not. This is war we are talking about, I don't care how secret these tapes are, we will be going to war because of them, so yes I will not be fooled by anyone's assurances that there is evidence. Fool me once shame on you, fool me twice shame on me.

August 30, 2013 at 4:03 am |

pat

And it took Dear Leader two years to figure it out cause he was way too busy spying on us! Just sayin.

So, let me get this straight. The fact that Syrian officials discussed an apparent chemical weapons attack in the suburbs of their capital city is somehow proof that the Syrian government was behind the attack? Because that's exactly what you and I are expected to believe by both this administration and the ever compliant CNN. The fact that neither the Obama administration nor the journalists at CNN and other media even mention that the rebels, not the government, launched a chemical weapons attack in Syria just several months ago shows you just how interested either are in having an informed public. youtube "UN says Syrian rebels used chemical weapons"

You are about to spend $billions bombing a country with hundreds of cruise missiles. Do you really want to be lied to in order to get your approval? Do you really want to deploy our country's awesome and deadly military might in the service of the Salafist maniacs who just gassed women and children?

If I was a 'rebel freedom fighter' I'd seriously be heading out of the area – Not IF but WHEN these missiles & drones start flying I'm pretty sure it won't differentiate between either side – it's gonna be a holocaust when these weapons hit biological, chemical & maybe nuclear sites. If all the 'bleeding hearts' were 'aghast' at a few hundred dead from a chemical I wonder what they're going to think when there's tens of thousands blown to smithereens??

You have a completely deluded conception of what would happen. The ONE thing American targeting cannot be called is 'indescriminate.' We will hit what we aim for. Just be damm glad we have developed these pin-point weapons because the alternative is mass B52 strikes.

August 30, 2013 at 9:04 am |

Drtjm Eryukm

if I say somthing that is not true cnn will follow up and report it assuming it is profitable...i am not paid as a journalist but if barbra star or cnn wants to send me a check you can make it out as a donation to the V.A. program of your choice. if say somthing it eather is true might be true or will be true depending on what I think/belive or do not. I am nothing and in that I am everything. you can kick the plug out of the wall but I will just plug it in some place else understand...

I still have a copy of the letter I wrote 01/05/2003 to then Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell asking him to oppose the impending attack on Iraq.

More than anything I was incensed then by the arrogance of President Bush as he proceeded with little international support and lukewarm public support. Yet he acted as though the only authority he needed or cared about was his own.

As a longtime supporter of you, one who had tears and goose bumps that night in Chicago as you stood with your family in Grant Park in 2008, I stand today in utter disbelief in the face of your personification of George Bush’s arrogance.

I was a good soldier in Viet Nam and I am a good citizen now. I deserve to be heard.

I cannot express strongly enough how repugnant any military action against Syria is to me. We are not the world’s police who need to intervene in a centuries old religious struggle. And if moral atrocities are the impetus then much more fertile ground can be found with the tens of thousands of starving innocent children around the globe.

This material is what in the news trade is called "single sourced". Single sourced, or "hearsay" news is by definition, unreliable – and that is why journalists are not permitted in their profession to write stories based on such material...its a 'no no". However, the corporate media tends to ignore the long established standards when it comes to cheerleading for war.... they seem to be of the notion that if the intelligence or military community puts out something for consumption by the general public, it must be true. (!). Furthermore, we can't forget that the parent corporate mega-conglomerates which own the media outlets that determine what Americans read, hear, see and inwardly digest, happen to *PROFIT* very handsomely from war – so its hardly surprising that CNN and the rest of them employ such duplicity when disseminating "news".

It was sort of shocking that we now find that the US is relying on Israeli intelligence to prove that the Syrians did the dirty deed. I still think Israel had a hand in the attack and their Agents in the US then become the anonymous US officials who tell us when and where the US will attack.

Anybody old enough to remember what CNN's big breakthrough moment was? Anybody remember Bernard Shaw's talk of "dog radar?" War put CNN in the big leagues and they badly need another one to win back viewers from Fox.

OBVIOUSLY PUTIN CAN MAKE MORE REFINED OIL FOR OPEC BUT THEN PUTIN WOULD BE UNDERCUTTING HIS SOFT CONTROL OF CHINA IN AT LEAST ONE WAY SUPPLY SIDE ECCONOMICS China can't make oil but they need oil and gas to run AMERICAS LARGEST COMPANY WALMART...IF GREEDY CHINA WANTS TO HAVE AN ECCONOMY SORT/LONG TERM THEY MIGHT START THINKING ABOUT TAKING AWAY PUTINS LAND/POWER IN RUSSIA . Putin could take over Syria but then Putin would have to hire someone else to keep shop and Putin said 'and replace Assad with what?...terrorists who will jump up and shot you (Putins Russia)' as soon as you knock Assad down.

Exactly. Assad "may have" pushed the button, but it'll take us sometime to splice the so called "intercepted calls" together. Why is the US so determined to go ahead with this when everyone else is backing away? As Dylan sang, "The answer my friend is blow'in in the oil."

russia and US created the UN too watch chinas nukes because russia shares the worlds largest boarder with china... but now russia and china want oil.. enter the worlds largest state sponsor of terror iran... which has lots of oil and supplys oil to opec like russia... russia wants to use the same soft control on chinas oil consumption both at the U.N. by keeping an eye on china through watching iran in syria. remember, syria used to belong to putins soviet unioun among other centimental things like shared DNA with Assad who has created a partnering with Iran over looking Syrias chemical weapons which were created/built by the Soviet Union & or Russia. You can see why Putin looks like the uninterested kid in the back of the school room who if called upon could teach the class with his eyes closed. The question I ask myself is why China allows themselfs to be put over a barrel at the U.N. by Putin when Putin asks China to partnering UN veto power concerning Syria...certianly China is more greedy than Russia by nature of the beast.

Fox removing the ability to comment on stories speaks volumnes about the level of propoganda they practice. Nothing like silencing all dissenting voices to make sure that your message, and ONLY your message, is what gets out. Its what every corrupt facist organization dreams of doing.

August 30, 2013 at 9:13 am |

Drtjm Eryukm

I remember a standard US news media broadcast saying assad agreed to take the gas for safe keeping from iraq of couse that would mean rumsfeld "sold" them to syria...of course no one "proved" that syria took delivery...but we all know what followed. we went over syria into iraq like we will go over syria into...assad has not sold his soul yet albiet he might not know how...

This is nonsense. Yahoo News had a story back in January that O might consent to a rebel plan to stage a chemical weapons attack and blame iit on Assad....as a pretext for increased American involvement. You can review the story yourself. And ask yourself...our "allies" over there (many affiliated with Al Qaeda)....would you really put it past them?

The administration is doing it's damnedest to keep the President from looking like a fool with his "Red Line" garbage. Very similar to the Bush's staff rush to push Saddam's WMD's down our throat prior to the Iraq fiasco.

Remember when there was no doubt of chemical weapons in Iraq? Everybody was so sure.

August 29, 2013 at 9:12 pm |

I Am God

RS U.N. inspectors confirmed the use of chemical weapons, but they do not know what type was used in the attack.

August 29, 2013 at 9:15 pm |

StanCalif

But there is still no proof WHO used gas in Syria. We are told to "assume" it was Assad, yet no proof! Using gas is much more to the benefit of the "rebels", if we ever figure out who the "rebels" really are!

August 29, 2013 at 10:16 pm |

George patton

let's not waste time in who was calling whom or what they were talking; start sorties friends. Kill them all and let UN sort them out.

Believe it or not, the UN does a lot of good at keeping peace in smaller emerging nations that have disputes which importantly keeps the major powers from getting involved. Unfortunately Syria's geopolitical importance in the Middle East has gotten too many nations at odds over "What to do" with the Syrian problem!

If the US attacks Syria alone, then we deserve whatever retaliatory strike that is launched against us from any of the regional allies of Syria that commit to protecting their ally. There is no imminent threat to America or our way of life, no threat to our security or national interests, or any hint from the Syrian government wants anything other than to restore order to their own country without external interference. It's time we butt out out and let the UN do this.

Of course I know we are part of the UN. I've met a former Secretary General while on an admirals staff. My issue is the US wants to go it on their own, without UN concurrence or ally support. It's history repeating itself, except this time not even Great Britain is onboard with us. How arrogant is this, really???

American officials insisted that ultimately the president will decide on his own timeline, dismissing the notion that maneuvers in the United Nations and British Parliament suggest a longer-term horizon before any cohesive response.

“We can’t wait, we need to act according to our own national interests,” said one senior U.S. official.

The British Parliament voted Thursday on a resolution that calls for no military action before the United Nations Security Council considers a report from weapons inspectors who are still in Syria and who are expected to be there for several more days.

“Why do we need to wait for a UN report to tell us what we already know,” said a senior U.S. official. Any decision to respond would not wait for UN inspectors, he said, noting the United States has told the UN it is not safe to be there. But “if they are there, it is not going to stop us.” Targets would not be in areas where inspectors are located.

August 29, 2013 at 8:39 pm |

Mverick5

What is it with this classified/declassified stuff. The people want to hear the truth of why they might be heading towards WW III and these people are going around cherry picking intercepted conversations

This isn't turning into a World War III. Russia and China will not get involved, because they know Syria has used chemical weapons. Iran will do nothing militarily, but I am sure they will send covert operatives to spread fear among the Syrian people.

I never agree to have the United States to go to war, but the use of chemical weapons shows the desperation of the Assad regime. If we do nothing, that just gives the incentive that the Assad regime can launch as many chemical weapons they want without having any interference till its to late. We need to interfere, because if we don't we are going to see similarities in Syria to the Holocaust.

I'm almost a the point of, "Who gives a crap if Assad gases his entire country to death?" Someone said in an earlier post that if we morally outraged at this there are bigger moral failures in the wold that we could engage in and reap some positive results like feeding starving children. There is no win in getting involved with Syria.

Actually, WMDs were in fact used by Saddam Hussein against his own people. Where those WMDs went, nobody can answer. President Clinton bombed Iraq in 1998 because of obstruction of the UN investigation into those WMDs. So, while you may want to spin the "no WMDs in Iraq" story to suit your political objective, that very same "lack of WMDs" is what creates the problem here. It has been suggested by many (including Iraqi Generals) that those WMDs in Iraq went into Syria. That is what lends credence to the argument that the Syrian rebels launched this WMD attack. If it weren't for those "missing WMDs from Iraq" that the Bush-bashers want to pretend never existed, then the question of who used the chemical agents would not be in question.

So which is it? Are you saying the world is wrong in suggesting that a party OTHER than Assad COULD have launched the attack? After all, Saddam didn't have WMDs, so none are missing; therefore, it MUST have been Assad?

Most of them were destroyed in 1993 by the UN. Some say Saddam hid a few tons in the desert then shipped them over to Syria prior to the 2003 invasion.

August 29, 2013 at 7:58 pm |

I Am God

Bill there is no proof of weapons being transported to Syria, especially after the initial invasion.

August 29, 2013 at 8:05 pm |

John McKane

Just more trumped up evidence against the Assad regime in order to go to war! They don't call the C.I.A. the Masters of Deceit for nothing since this is what they do so well. Then again, police and prosecutors do the same thing in court in order to get convictions however false they may be!

On the mass level of casualties seen, this could only have been done by an airborne delivery system. These people didn't sign up to get gassed and the fact that they then pummeled the area with artillery leads only to the conclusion that it was meant to destroy and degrade the evidence. This isn't rocket science.

Once they have their excuse, they plaster it in all the news media so we're brainwashed into believing them. Sorry, but we the people have woken up and we see your lies for what they are. Excuses to try to justify more wars, more warmongering.

How would the Syrian government benefit from using Sarin gas? They wouldn't. Look who benefits from a government using Sarin gas. The invaders. Because they finally have the excuse they need to attack.

The "rebels" (in fact, terrorists) were NOT receiving popular support there or in any part of Syria. In fact, the Syrian population DESPISES them. They merely took temporary foothold and were being ousted when the chemical weapons were used. Why would the government use chems when they're winning the war with conventional weaponry and their soldiers were several hundred feet away? Chemical weapons, unlike conventional weapons, cannot be controlled. Once it's unleashed, the goes wherever it goes, often blown further in the direction of the wind for example. Now, who uses this form of warfare? The terrorists. Check out liveleak, you;ll see plenty of videos of them pointing mortars in every direction and just bombarding civilian areas. The Syrian army (which consists of mostly Sunni's contrary to what they'd have you believe here in the MSM), along with the militias and national defense brigades (formed during this conflict) take due diligence to locate, target, and destroy the terrorists with as minimal casualties to the civilian population (also, contrary to what you were lead to believe). Now compare.. the terrorists "spray and pray" techniques (verifiable in many of their videos), versus the army's targeted eradication of the terrorists..

August 30, 2013 at 12:27 am |

TiredOfPaying

The 'rebels' lost 800 people the previous week. The cease-fire called for because the UN inspectors were in the area prevented figiting for about a week. So in terms of casualties its pretty much a wash – but the 'rebels' get international involvement on their behalf, many thousands of Syran troops killed and sympathy from the world. As an added bonus, none of those killed were 'rebels' – just expendable civilians. It is quite possible – in fact very logical in a cold-hearted way – that the 'rebels' did this to themselves.

August 30, 2013 at 9:23 am |

us_1776

NSA, THIS is what you are supposed to be doing.

Intercepting conversations about crimes against humanity by foreign dictators.

Syria is NOT our business!!! They simply want to kill each other and destroy their own country. Let them complete their tasks! Neither side, in Syria, is no friend of the USA! Why is this our business? We did not "save" Iraq, Afghanistan, Lydia, nor Egypt! Why do we think we can save Syria??? We can't. This is their problem.

Imagine being gassed by your government and no one in the world being willing to help you. Think WWII.

Sidenote: This isn't occupying Obama's time. This is occupying the military's and State Department's time. This is their job – to watch the world for issues relevant to US interests, whether of obvious interest or through international obligation, and in the case of the military, be aware of and prepared for situations that may involve a military solution.

None of that changes that Syria is a true quagmire in which no one is America's friend, no one is necessarily in the right, and the sides may simply be proxies for others (Middle Eastern states jockeying for influence, or the Cold War reloaded).

The way I look at it Islamist countries are the ones at war and killing each other. I trust Israel hands down before give credence to anything that comes out of Gaza, Lebanon, Somalia, Iran and the like.

....and Israel is essentially committing crimes against humanity every day with their oppression of anyone not Jewish, but we don't look at it because they are "the good guys". As much as I dislike Israel's policies though, I suppose it is still better than most Muslim countries, but that does not excuse their behavior either.

August 29, 2013 at 7:26 pm |

Anonymous

I don't know about that. The muslims have everyone outnumbered in the amount of wars they start. Then again what else can you expect from the adherents of allah the false god of death? Just look how the crazy muslims shout "allah ackbar" before they shoot anything whether they hit or miss. Praising allah when they kill people, praising allah when they destroy homes, praising allah when they kill themselves, heck I even seen in the full video of this recent chemical attack them praising allah while they watch their children suffocate to death on the rewards of allah. Either allah is a false idol, or is the devil himself.

Post a comment

CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.

Search Security Clearance

Share this blog

About this blog

CNN's Security Clearance examines national and global security, terrorism and intelligence, as well as the economic, military, political and diplomatic effects of it around the globe, with contributions from CNN's national security team in Washington and CNN journalists around the world.